Monday night’s Home Run Derby proved to be a short contest for Charlie Blackmon. Despite swatting an impressive 14 bombs in a heart-pounding first round of the jovial tournament, the Colorado Rockies’ bearded leadoff hitter was eliminated early by Cody Bellinger of the Los Angeles Dodgers.

Blackmon’s 20 home runs and .319 average at the All Star break suggest he has a promising future in baseball. But even if professional sports don’t work out for him, he has some impressive credentials to fall back on: The outfielder earned his bachelor’s degree in finance from the Georgia Institute of Technology in 2011.

Not all of Blackmon’s teammates are similarly educated, though, and Major League Baseball is working to change that. Last month, the league announced a partnership with Northeastern University in Boston to provide players with access to a host of higher-education opportunities. Northeastern is now MLB’s “preferred education provider,” a moniker that baseball executives hope will help steer players toward reliable learning opportunities.

Related Story

“Players and clubs have been putting money aside for players to continue their education for decades,” Paul Mifsud, a vice president for MLB, said. “[But] that money was not being used efficiently, and a lot of players were taking that money and spending it on for-profit institutions with very low graduation rates.”

In the 1960s, MLB established the College Scholarship Program, which promised to fund the academic pursuits taken up by players within two years of their retirement from baseball. But, as Mifsud indicated, many players spent that money on for-profit schools, which offered the academic flexibility appealing to professional athletes. Though the Trump administration has proven more sympathetic to for-profit schools, the sector was a frequent target of Obama-era reforms, coming under fire for abysmal job prospects for graduates, predatory recruitment efforts, and less-than-altruistic motives.

During collective bargaining this year, a change was made to the College Scholarship Program (now called the Continuing Education Program) that prohibits players from using the money on for-profit schools with a graduation rate below 50 percent. According to the most recent statistics from the Department of Education, the six-year graduation rate for private, for-profit schools is just 23 percent nationwide. But, Mifsud said, barring players from enrolling in what was a popular academic option left a void MLB needed to fill.

“We're now telling our players, ‘Here’s an avenue we know you’ve been using to get education,’ and we’re telling you you can’t use that anymore,” Mifsud said. “We did not think it appropriate to not offer them an alternative.”

That’s where Northeastern comes in. By partnering with the school, Mifsud said the league is signaling to its players that the university is a good option for them to further their educations. Players will have the chance to select courses from across the university’s academic offerings and earn certificates and degrees based on their prior educational experiences. What appealed to players about for-profit education—namely, flexibility—is also offered at Northeastern, which has campuses across North America as well as various online options. Northeastern President Joseph Aoun said the school is particularly committed to non-traditional learners, and that each player will also have access to a counselor to create a personalized learning plan.

Roughly 30 percent of today’s Major League Baseball players were born outside the United States, and English is certainly not everyone’s first language. In response, Aoun said Northeastern has vast experience working with international students and the school will work directly with non-native speakers to develop personalized learning plans for them, too.

“We are going to work with each player based on where the player is, what the background is, and also the goals and what they would like to study and what they would like to achieve,” Aoun said.

And those academic backgrounds are incredibly varied among ballplayers. Some, like Blackmon of the Rockies, completed their bachelor’s degrees. Many others, however, never stepped foot on a college campus. Unlike their counterparts contending for the NBA or the NFL, baseball players are eligible to be drafted immediately after graduating from high school, and a slew of other players sign professional contracts after their junior years of college. In both cases, the athletes have not earned a postsecondary degree, and Mifsud said they often leverage their remaining college eligibility to snag higher signing bonuses during contract negotiations. The bonus therefore becomes a monetary incentive to forgo higher education, and dugouts fill with athletes at all points on the academic spectrum.

“It's not purely altruistic: It's also a benefit to baseball.”

For players like David Wright, Prince Fielder, and Adam Jones, eschewing college for a Major League contract has ostensibly worked out: With multi-million dollar salaries, the all-stars likely won’t need to look toward education as a means to a lucrative career. But few of the ballplayers who ink deals with Major League franchises will even make it to the batter’s box in a professional park. According to Mother Jones, just one in 10 Minor Leaguers—who have signed Major League contracts and typically play for a franchise’s affiliate team until they’re ready for the big leagues—ever gets called up. And, as The Atlantic has previously reported, the wages doled out in the minors are often below the poverty level. The 90 percent of players who never get “the call” will likely need a second act to live a comfortable life.

“From the rookie [perspective], it's most pressing because that person likely ... does not have access to a tremendous amount of wealth that can keep him alive and happy for the rest of his life,” Mifsud said. “He’s going to need to do something after baseball in order to earn an income, and it’s our sincere hope that Northeastern University will help provide that player with a significant path toward sustainability for himself.”

Even for the players to whom education is not a necessary financial safety net, Mifsud and Aoun said the partnership would be productive. Aoun emphasized that lifelong learning is more important now than ever, as new fields are created and people constantly attain new skills to keep up with the evolving jobs landscape.

“People pursue a life of fulfillment and achievement, and education is key in this dimension,” Aoun said. “People need to understand who they are. People need to manage what they have. People need to continue to grow in their lives and they may look at other professional options, even though they don't need it for financial reasons.”

And though the partnership is especially appealing as players consider life after baseball, Mifsud said educational options for athletes still on professional rosters are a boon for the game itself.

“It's not purely altruistic: It's also a benefit to baseball,” Mifsud said. “One, our teams believe that players who are developed off the field are also the players who perform the best on the field. … Two, if we want kids to make that jump from high school or college right into baseball without completing their collegiate education, then providing a support system ... will also encourage more players to continue to play ... when they have other professional choices ahead of them."

According to Robin Hughes, an associate professor at Indiana University-Indianapolis and the co-editor of the Journal for the Study of Sports and Athletes in Education, the partnership is a step in the right direction. About 10 years ago, Hughes said she had a similar idea but met pushback from colleagues in the higher-education community resistant to something so “out of the box.” Hughes suggested Northeastern may hear from critics who say the school is watering down its academics for the athletes and recommended ball clubs consider traveling with a tutor to supplement players’ studies.

“I think it’s smart. It makes good sense,” Hughes said. “You can be a baseball player, a basketball player—you can play anything—but you can also be educated. You can do two things: You can be an athlete and you can also be a scholar.”

It’s too early to tell which academic programs will be the most popular among the ballplayers or if the partnership will be successful in general, but Mifsud said players have expressed immediate interest. In fact, one athlete called Northeastern within a day of the program’s announcement.

About the Author

Most Popular

Five days after Hurricane Maria made landfall in Puerto Rico, its devastating impact is becoming clearer.

Five days after Hurricane Maria made landfall in Puerto Rico, its devastating impact is becoming clearer. Most of the U.S. territory currently has no electricity or running water, fewer than 250 of the island’s 1,600 cellphone towers are operational, and damaged ports, roads, and airports are slowing the arrival and transport of aid. Communication has been severely limited and some remote towns are only now being contacted. Jenniffer Gonzalez, the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico, told the Associated Press that Hurricane Maria has set the island back decades.

A small group of programmers wants to change how we code—before catastrophe strikes.

There were six hours during the night of April 10, 2014, when the entire population of Washington State had no 911 service. People who called for help got a busy signal. One Seattle woman dialed 911 at least 37 times while a stranger was trying to break into her house. When he finally crawled into her living room through a window, she picked up a kitchen knife. The man fled.

The 911 outage, at the time the largest ever reported, was traced to software running on a server in Englewood, Colorado. Operated by a systems provider named Intrado, the server kept a running counter of how many calls it had routed to 911 dispatchers around the country. Intrado programmers had set a threshold for how high the counter could go. They picked a number in the millions.

The greatest threats to free speech in America come from the state, not from activists on college campuses.

The American left is waging war on free speech. That’s the consensus from center-left to far right; even Nazis and white supremacists seek to wave the First Amendment like a bloody shirt. But the greatest contemporary threat to free speech comes not from antifa radicals or campus leftists, but from a president prepared to use the power and authority of government to chill or suppress controversial speech, and the political movement that put him in office, and now applauds and extends his efforts.

The most frequently cited examples of the left-wing war on free speech are the protests against right-wing speakers that occur on elite college campuses, some of which have turned violent.New York’s Jonathan Chait has described the protests as a “war on the liberal mind” and the “manifestation of a serious ideological challenge to liberalism—less serious than the threat from the right, but equally necessary to defeat.” Most right-wing critiques fail to make such ideological distinctions, and are far more apocalyptic—some have unironically proposed state laws that define how universities are and are not allowed to govern themselves in the name of defending free speech.

A growing body of research debunks the idea that school quality is the main determinant of economic mobility.

One of the most commonly taught stories American schoolchildren learn is that of Ragged Dick, Horatio Alger’s 19th-century tale of a poor, ambitious teenaged boy in New York City who works hard and eventually secures himself a respectable, middle-class life. This “rags to riches” tale embodies one of America’s most sacred narratives: that no matter who you are, what your parents do, or where you grow up, with enough education and hard work, you too can rise the economic ladder.

A body of research has since emerged to challenge this national story, casting the United States not as a meritocracy but as a country where castes are reinforced by factors like the race of one’s childhood neighbors and how unequally income is distributed throughout society. One such study was published in 2014, by a team of economists led by Stanford’s Raj Chetty. After analyzing federal income tax records for millions of Americans, and studying, for the first time, the direct relationship between a child’s earnings and that of their parents, they determined that the chances of a child growing up at the bottom of the national income distribution to ever one day reach the top actually varies greatly by geography. For example, they found that a poor child raised in San Jose, or Salt Lake City, has a much greater chance of reaching the top than a poor child raised in Baltimore, or Charlotte. They couldn’t say exactly why, but they concluded that five correlated factors—segregation, family structure, income inequality, local school quality, and social capital—were likely to make a difference. Their conclusion: America is land of opportunity for some. For others, much less so.

One hundred years ago, a retail giant that shipped millions of products by mail moved swiftly into the brick-and-mortar business, changing it forever. Is that happening again?

Amazon comes to conquer brick-and-mortar retail, not to bury it. In the last two years, the company has opened 11 physical bookstores. This summer, it bought Whole Foods and its 400 grocery locations. And last week, the company announced a partnership with Kohl’s to allow returns at the physical retailer’s stores.

Why is Amazon looking more and more like an old-fashioned retailer? The company’s do-it-all corporate strategy adheres to a familiar playbook—that of Sears, Roebuck & Company. Sears might seem like a zombie today, but it’s easy to forget how transformative the company was exactly 100 years ago, when it, too, was capitalizing on a mail-to-consumer business to establish a physical retail presence.

The foundation of Donald Trump’s presidency is the negation of Barack Obama’s legacy.

It is insufficient to statethe obvious of Donald Trump: that he is a white man who would not be president were it not for this fact. With one immediate exception, Trump’s predecessors made their way to high office through the passive power of whiteness—that bloody heirloom which cannot ensure mastery of all events but can conjure a tailwind for most of them. Land theft and human plunder cleared the grounds for Trump’s forefathers and barred others from it. Once upon the field, these men became soldiers, statesmen, and scholars; held court in Paris; presided at Princeton; advanced into the Wilderness and then into the White House. Their individual triumphs made this exclusive party seem above America’s founding sins, and it was forgotten that the former was in fact bound to the latter, that all their victories had transpired on cleared grounds. No such elegant detachment can be attributed to Donald Trump—a president who, more than any other, has made the awful inheritance explicit.

National Geographic Magazine has opened its annual photo contest, with the deadline for submissions coming up on November 17.

National Geographic Magazine has opened its annual photo contest for 2017, with the deadline for submissions coming up on November 17. The Grand Prize Winner will receive $10,000 (USD), publication in National Geographic Magazine and a feature on National Geographic’s Instagram account. The folks at National Geographic were, once more, kind enough to let me choose among the contest entries so far for display here. The captions below were written by the individual photographers, and lightly edited for style.

What the Trump administration has been threatening is not a “preemptive strike.”

Donald Trump lies so frequently and so brazenly that it’s easy to forget that there are political untruths he did not invent. Sometimes, he builds on falsehoods that predated his election, and that enjoy currency among the very institutions that generally restrain his power.

That’s the case in the debate over North Korea. On Monday, The New York Timesdeclared that “the United States has repeatedly suggested in recent months” that it “could threaten pre-emptive military action” against North Korea. On Sunday, The Washington Post—after asking Americans whether they would “support or oppose the U.S. bombing North Korean military targets” in order “to get North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons”—announced that “Two-thirds of Americans oppose launching a preemptive military strike.” Citing the Post’s findings, The New York Times the same day reported that Americans are “deeply opposed to the kind of pre-emptive military strike” that Trump “has seemed eager to threaten.”

More comfortable online than out partying, post-Millennials are safer, physically, than adolescents have ever been. But they’re on the brink of a mental-health crisis.

One day last summer, around noon, I called Athena, a 13-year-old who lives in Houston, Texas. She answered her phone—she’s had an iPhone since she was 11—sounding as if she’d just woken up. We chatted about her favorite songs and TV shows, and I asked her what she likes to do with her friends. “We go to the mall,” she said. “Do your parents drop you off?,” I asked, recalling my own middle-school days, in the 1980s, when I’d enjoy a few parent-free hours shopping with my friends. “No—I go with my family,” she replied. “We’ll go with my mom and brothers and walk a little behind them. I just have to tell my mom where we’re going. I have to check in every hour or every 30 minutes.”

Those mall trips are infrequent—about once a month. More often, Athena and her friends spend time together on their phones, unchaperoned. Unlike the teens of my generation, who might have spent an evening tying up the family landline with gossip, they talk on Snapchat, the smartphone app that allows users to send pictures and videos that quickly disappear. They make sure to keep up their Snapstreaks, which show how many days in a row they have Snapchatted with each other. Sometimes they save screenshots of particularly ridiculous pictures of friends. “It’s good blackmail,” Athena said. (Because she’s a minor, I’m not using her real name.) She told me she’d spent most of the summer hanging out alone in her room with her phone. That’s just the way her generation is, she said. “We didn’t have a choice to know any life without iPads or iPhones. I think we like our phones more than we like actual people.”

Senators Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy sparred with Bernie Sanders and Amy Klobuchar on CNN hours after their bill dismantling Obamacare appeared to collapse.

Ordinarily, you debate to stave off defeat. But for Senators Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy on Monday night, the defeat came first.

By the time the two GOP senators stepped on CNN’s stage Monday night for a prime-time debate over their health-care proposal, they knew they had already lost.

A few hours earlier, Senator Susan Collins became the third Republican to formally reject the pair’s legislation to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, effectively killing its chances for passage through the Senate this week. Graham and Cassidy had hoped to use the forum to make a closing argument for their plan, and to line it up against Senator Bernie Sanders and his call for a single-payer, “Medicare-for-All” health-care system. Instead, the two senators found themselves defending a proposal that was no less hypothetical—and probably much less popular—than Sanders’s supposed liberal fantasy.